Saturday, January 15

I GUESS IT DEPENDS ON HOW YOU DEFINE "LETHAL"

While Americans were dying over non-existent WMD's in Iraq, it was recently revealed by the Sunshine Project that the U.S. military was researching and developing chemical and biological weapons of our own. Documents obtained by the organization detailed a variety of different chemical agents to be used for non-lethal purposes. Additionally, the group found that the military was experimenting with agents similar to the deadly Sarin and VX within the non-lethal program.

Within a September 2003 report the group stated, "The discovery that the Army is investigating close relatives of extremely lethal nerve gases as "non-lethal" weapons heightens concerns previously raised that the Army's "non-lethal" chemical weapons program is practically indistinguishable from one with a fully lethal intent. The Army's interest in tacrine should draw particular scrutiny from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and governments who are members of the Chemical Weapons Convention."

Reminds me a little of the difference between the no-no "torture resulting in death or a pain akin to losing a body part" and the OK "non-lethal torture," which is, of course, not torture at all, but ABUSE. By such definition, I suppose, "non-lethal" chemical weapons are OK with the U.S. as opposed to "fully lethal," which are not.

My Liberal Identity:

You are a Peace Patroller, also known as an anti-war liberal or hippie. You believe in putting an end to American imperial conquest, stopping wars that have already been lost, and supporting our troops by bringing them home.